Philip S, 'If that survey was 2001 it is useless at this time..'

It was 2001, getting on to 20 years ago. Which is not something that Foxy would be telling anyone. Which explains the lack of a link and 'Go find it yourself'. -Both hoping that the reader would swallow it and not be so inquisitive. It is so old that it takes some digging anyhow.

But the other limitations on interpretation were not mentioned either. The most significant being the use of the word 'somewhat' to get a far higher number of positives, 84% of declared Labor respondents in this case.

As mentioned earlier, 'somewhat' means: a little, a bit, a little bit, to a limited extent/degree, to a certain degree, to some extent, to some degree, (up) to a point, in some measure, rather, quite, within limits.

'Somewhat' ensures a high number of positives. 'Somewhat' requires a person to admit some value or vague liking somewhere. It is saying, 'Tick me, even if you can only find a tiny bit of potential positive, no matter how small, unlikely or contentious'.

A more recent and informed opinion is that of the outgoing CEO of the ABC states in an address to the Press Club that the ABC duplicates the SBS and there are substantial savings that ought be mad.

Which should have automatically triggered a full comprehensive audit of both bodies by the Australian National Audit Office. Accounting and audit standards are relevant.

That the ANAO comprehensive audit was side-stepped, neglected, is a question that should be directed at the audit committees of both ABC and SBS. There are very serious governance issues. They do have audit committees, don't they?

The Newspoll to which I
refer was done in late 2014.

If any other organisation had such high proportions of
people valuing it across the country it would be very
happy indeed because it is evidence that the National
Broadcaster is providing value for the money invested in
it.

Foxy

How come the same % was found? What about the link to the survey, because the same restrictions as before likely apply?

The qualifier 'somewhat', as in somewhat good, does not imply any judgement or assurance of value for money.

If the outgoing CEO of a private organisation stated publicly, let alone in an address to the National Press Club, that he had presided over duplication that wasted millions, he would expect to lose any bonus and there definitely would be interest from the audit committee, that would be answering questions itself why that was allowed to be. And what about the senior executive of the SBS?

So, Tony, you think that it is incumbent on a government to entertain the voters? That cooking shows are an essential service ranking with education and healthcare.

If the ABC is taking viewers from the other stations, then essentially it is taking advertising revenue and making it difficult for them to spend the money to create the shows that you like. Personally, I have not found the ABC shows to be much better than those of the independent channels.

Foxy, everything that is free is popular if the ABC had to subsidise its revenue with Ads etc, their viewership would drop.

Before leaving this discussion I would like to add
the following link:

http://thecoversation.com/public-broadcasters-play-a-major-cultural-role-beyond-the-market-26033

In it Prof. Graeme Turner tells us -

"What remains distinctive about the ABC and the SBS is that
their programming is not solely about producing entertainment
that will deliver market share... it is also about informing
the nation and serving the public good."

Prof. Turner tell us that "They do this most directly through,
among other things, investigative news and current affairs
such as "Four Corners," "Foreign Correspondent," and "Dateline",
through consumer watchdog programs such as "Media-Watch", "The
Checkout", and "The Gruen Transfer", and through inter-active
public issues programs such as "QandA" and "Insight".

"SBS, even more so than the ABC, has produced programs such as
"Go Back To Where You Came From," that explicitly challenge the
standard lines of public debate on major issues. None of these
programs, with the exception of "Gruen" would be financially
viable for a commercial network."

Prof. Turner goes on to say that "Democracy depends on freely
available and accessible information, and access should not
be dependent upon the citizen's capacity to pay."

"Our public broadcasters address a national public, not just a
market, or a targeted demographic, or a network. Through its
inclusion of the broad range of interests required for a
legitimate conversation with this public, it helps to normalise
the encounter with different points of view upon which a
functional liberal society depends."

"This does not only happen through information programming; it
also happens through drama and entertainment (think "Redfern Now").

"At its best, the ABC can play a major cultural role in helping
the Australian public better understand social, political and
cultural complexity. It may do this with varying focus, intensity
and success, and it may do it in varying ways (from "7.30" to
"Gardening Australia") but no other component of Australia's
media environment is charged with that task."

Foxy,

What a shocker, a left whinge professor of cultural studies thinks that having a left whinge public funded organisation is a good idea because of its left whinge cultural programs.